AIB AIB's Appeals Panel says that the tracker rate would have equalled the SVR

Trackscandal

Registered User
Messages
12
The Tracker Panel seem to have accepted that AIB should have offered a Tracker rate equivalent to the SVR rate. If so then this could be very significant for some people depending on the time that they exited the fixed rate. This is what the panel wrote in the final decision as set out in the first thread:

The Panel was satisfied that, ha been offered a tracker mortgage in February 2011, when their fixed rate period came to an end, the prevailing rate of such a tracker mortgage at that time would have equalled or exceeded the standard variable rate or fixed rate. Accordingly, the Panel determined that .......suffered no loss..."

For example on 19/05/2009 the SVR margin was 1.25% and the tracker margin was 1.1% on a loan I have been deemed impacted on. In Feb 2011 which is the relevant date in the rejection letter in the first post the SVR margin was 2.15% but this this margin has increased since this date.. Accordingly the Tracker Panel are incorrect when they state that "....suffered no loss" if a Tracker rate was offered with the same margin as the SVR rate.

Maybe this point should be incorporated into the appeals of people who benefit from same?
 

Trackscandal

Registered User
Messages
12
It is a similar argument to this one which shows that neither AIB nor the Appeals Panel understands what a tracker mortgage is.

Did your AIB fixed rate mature in late 2008?
Brendan
Hi Brendan,

No I was deemed impacted for another reason. I have had 3 large mortgages impacted that all started on a tracker rate.

I have a small mortgage where 3.2 is relevant and I decided to appeal and use your model hence my interest in this thread. I broke out of a fixed rate in late 2011.

It should be noted that the 1.25% margin in the SVR referenced above continued until 06/Aug/2010 when it increased to 1.75%. So a lot of people if offered the margin appropriate to the SVR rate would have benefited and it seems the tracker panel decision would help their argument.

In my first post above I reference the "first post" of a different thread so while I appreciate you started a new thread to highlight this point it may make it more difficult for people to follow.
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
37,957
Hi TS

I moved it from this thread I assume: AIB's Appeals Panel standard rejection letter on prevailing rate issue

I am not sure that the context is lost by moving it. But if you think that there is some post which is needed in this thread, post a link to it and I will copy it to this thread. And it's an important issue worth highlighting in a separate thread.

First of all, if you have had your appeal rejected by the Appeals Panel, then their reasons don't really matter. If you decide to go to the Ombudsman or the High Court, the views of the Appeals Panel are as irrelevant as the views of the Central Bank. The Ombudsman will judge the case on its merits.

AIB has not made this argument about it being equal. They have always claimed that the tracker rate would have been much higher than the SVR. So there is no point in challenging the "equalled" view with the Ombudsman.

But if you still have an appeal with the Appeals Panel should you make this argument?

Let's think how you might word it.

"I note that the Appeals Panel has rejected other appeals on this issue on the basis that the The Panel was satisfied that, ha been offered a tracker mortgage in February 2011, when their fixed rate period came to an end, the prevailing rate of such a tracker mortgage at that time would have equalled or exceeded the standard variable rate or fixed rate. Accordingly, the Panel determined that .......suffered no loss...

It occurs to me from reading this that the Appeals Panel does not understand how tracker mortgages work.

My primary argument is that AIB did, in fact, have a prevailing tracker rate. If the Appeals Panel dismisses this argument, then you have to decide what the rate might have been. We have already argued that AIB always made the tracker rate less than or equal to the SVR. Now you see to have agreed that the at that time, the tracker mortgage rate "would have equalled or exceeded the SVR". Well if it had equalled the SVR, the tracker rate in February 2011 would have been 3.25% at a time when the ECB rate was 1%. So the margin on my loan would have been 2.25%.

3825

As you can see from this, the tracker rate would have been marginally higher up to July 2012, but after that the SVR was way higher, so I did lose out"
 

Attachments

Bronte

Frequent Poster
Messages
13,464
On what basis did the Appeals Panel make a decision on what the tracker would have been?

BB should the OP not argue for a margin of 1.1 over ECB rate as that is what he has been on.
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
37,957
BB should the OP not argue for a margin of 1.1 over ECB rate as that is what he has been on.
This is a very specific issue and a very complicated issue and I don't want the thread to go off topic. He has made that argument and it has been rejected.

Brendan
 
Top